Look, there is no sense in continuing this debate. You're just not getting it, and then get all defensive and call us 'arrogant'. No, it's just that you refuse or are unable to understand the issue. Not seeing the 'entire picture', indeed.
Your analogies; turbines, flying wheels, etc. just prove that. You simply do not understand that those examples can not do the same as an EMdrive, because their power ratio is too weak; they never get to the point where you get MORE power out than you put in, because even for a photon rocket it would need to reach the speed of light for that, which is impossible. But since the reported thrust to power ratios for the EmDrive are orders of magnitude higher, you get far *more* energy back than you put in (at speeds that ARE attainable) - which is of course, bullocks. Losses, friction, torque, etc. only matter if you have the same amount of energy that you 'recycle'; that's why, in practise, you can not build a perpetuum mobile with the same energy you put in, because each time you get losses to the original amount of energy, and eventually it dries up. But those systems *can not* make more energy on itself than you put in, because their power ratio is too weak. No other device, not even a photon rocket, can achieve it with the power ratio it has. The EMdrive claims it has and thus does.
Ergo, you can get far more energy out of it than you put in, at speeds/thrusts that are attainable, and thus, it does not matter if it's from an outside source or not, as long as the energy keeps flowing. And it keeps flowing because it generates MORE energy than you put in, in total. With power ratios like that, you do not need to accelerate 'indefinitely', that is just the point!
Now, you can debate semantics all you want, claiming a perpetuum mobile means something else to you, but it doesn't change anything to the fact that such a thing isn't possible, and since the EMdrive would make it possible, the EMdrive, as a reactionless drive with the proclaimed power ratio, is nonsense. Yes, yes, you do not agree, but that still doesn't change anything to that fact.
Several people have tried to explain it to you in the most simple and clear way by now, and yet you persist in refuting it, or are unable to grasp this. Well, so be it.